Blackmagic Design today announced Blackmagic URSA, a high end digital film camera designed to revolutionize workflow on set for feature films, commercials, episodic TV production and much more.

Blackmagic URSA is built to handle the ergonomics of large film crews, as well as single person use, with multiple accessories including a massive 10” fold out monitor, large user upgradable Super 35 global shutter 4K image sensor, built in scopes, and internal dual RAW and ProRes recorders.

The larger professional size of the Blackmagic URSA has the space for powerful cooling that allows higher frame rates. The camera has a modular camera turret, which includes the sensor, lens mount and lens control connections. The turret can be removed and replaced or upgraded in the future when new sensors are developed. There are four models to choose from:

Hey BMSorry to say this, but the monitor is a terrible idea... add a replaceable VF. You don't want a monitor that you can't remove... and another thing.. it makes it look like a toy. Other than that great camera.

Hardly delivery of the BMCC 4K arrive 1 year later!You take out a piece of news will be on drugs without the first one 4k with the utility version 1.7 still records in RAW!!!Even the manufacturers of washing machines do better...Be serious!

Ok I use my assistant to translate better. So what I mean is that the delivery of the 2st BMCC 4K cameras on the market took almost one year.It's still not possible to shoot in raw with this camera even with the 1.7 update whereas a new BMCC Camera is today out...It's quite amazing. even washing machine resellers do better job. It will be better that engineers could at least work on the firmware to provide raw and if possible in 60p for BMCC 4K camera

I get a really bad taste of this announcements. Two weeks ago i could finally buy the BMPC 4K. To work with this professional I have to buy a lot of extra tools to make this camera work. I have to buy an expensive Juicelink audio amplifier because you can't record quality sound with wireles microphones and you cant see audiolevels. I have to buy a external LCD monitor because outside you will see really nothing and i have to buy an external battery because the camera battery will work for only 45 minutes. Production??? You call this....

I have to buy me an fortune of extra tools to make this a real working production camera and now you announce two months after releasing the BMPC a new camera with everything you forgot on the previous camera's. So what about me? I bougth this camera two weeks ago because they told me it was a "production camera". Is it like; "sorry you have to buy an new "complete" camera or can i get a rebate and change my BMPC when the URSA comes out.

Well, I have high hopes for this. As it so happens I am shopping for a replacement for my Sony EX1 with higher resolution to take us into the future. A fully shootable Scarlet is a bit too much to bite on, and the BMPC is a bit too bare.

Sadly, our fiscal ends in June, and you don't list shipping until July. And I am not sure how optimistic that ship date is. Everything about this camera hits the right buttons for my needs Right mounts, right sized sensors, no need for an external monitor in most cases, can take big batteries, can be easily rail mounted, XRLs (finally), right codecs, SDI in/out.

Well done. I wish it was available now as I've got a historical documentary to shoot next month that is going to have to be done in HD on the Sony, or 2.5k if I want to risk shooting it on my personal BMCC.

Seems very heavy for handheld work. Almost twice the weight of the current de facto handheld camera, the Sony PDW 800, at around 9lbs. That maybe an unfair comparison given that the Ursa uses a Super 35mm sensor but then so does the Aja Cion and that tips the scales at an even more manageable 7.4 pounds. What isn't unfair, however, is taking this weight issue seriously. Camera operators deserve to go home after a days hand held without being in pain. Could this camera have further health and safety issues over the likes of the widely used PDW 800 ? For example, a limit on the time it can be operated hand held - wonder if BECTU (the union in the UK) will have a view on this ?

What does Blackmagic have against hi frame rates? The iPhone 5s can do 120fps, a freakin' cell phone. I noticed you can connect a DSLR to the URSA, can I connect my iPhone to it for great action shots.

Blackmagic, you are doing some amazing things, granted. but a little short on the frame rate side. The BMCC 2.0 hopefully will do 90-120fps, and the BMPC at least 120fps in its next version.

It would have thought the URSA could do up to 120fps, especially since it seems to do nearly everything else. Or is that a future upgrade sensor?

It's not like the URSA has to do 1000fps, maybe up to 320 or 360 at least.

There shouldn't be any difference. For years we shot docco and drama on digi beta then HDCAM. Going hand held was just a matter of flicking the trusty VCT 14. Why on earth isn't the URSA designed for drama - where you often want to go hand held ? For years I shot on an Arri SR or an Aaton XTR - they were docco and drama cameras. 35mm was a different story but for a broad range of TV drama we shot on shoulder mount cameras that could be easily and securely tripod mounted. Surely enough we are going to have to go back to those days and that's where AJA have the more sensible ergonomics and that's a camera costing just a little more.

Where does it say it's not for hand held work, which is basically all TV and Film (at least at some point ) ? Let's not forget it will come in 2/3inch B4 - the domain of EFP cameras like the PDW 800. And weight isn't just a factor for 'handy looky' (as Ikegami called it in their user manuals !) '- my Vinten Vision 100 (a £4k tripod) will struggle to counterbalance that weight - is their target market really going to be able to afford a set of Ronfords or similar ? Maybe it would help if BM told us exactly what it is suitable for. I was hoping it was suitable for film making, myself. If it's not for drama or docco then what is it for ? Commercials then ? - ah wait a minute, three of the last six I shot had hand held @ 120fps so maybe not.

I don't own a BMCC myself but really feel for those that have invested. Worse of all must be seeing your investment lose a huge chunk of it's value.

I hired one the other day and it was far from a finished product. Not being able to check the time remaining on the drive cost us two hours per day, the Zebras not having a range (e.g. +/- 5%) and the way the 709 conversion is handled and/or a lack of dynamic range may have cost us the series.

chrisser1976 wrote:There shouldn't be any difference. For years we shot docco and drama on digi beta then HDCAM. Going hand held was just a matter of flicking the trusty VCT 14. Why on earth isn't the URSA designed for drama - where you often want to go hand held ? For years I shot on an Arri SR or an Aaton XTR - they were docco and drama cameras. 35mm was a different story but for a broad range of TV drama we shot on shoulder mount cameras that could be easily and securely tripod mounted. Surely enough we are going to have to go back to those days and that's where AJA have the more sensible ergonomics and that's a camera costing just a little more.

Looks to me, the URSA fits right in with other common Digital Cinema cameras when they are rigged similarly with confidence monitor, battery, recording load, etc. And it appears to be maybe a pound or two heavier than traditional 2/3" shoulder mount cameras when they are rigged similarly for 2 person operation.

This is NOT a shouldercam. It is NOT a 2/3 broadcast camera. See the integrated rail mounts? Your shoulder cam's don't have that because they weren't designed for the same job.

Yes, the AJA Cion is lighter. However, I note that it is not carrying a screen of any kind (just an EVF). It's got a shoulder mount which means they were intentionally trying for that form factor. It's also going to be nose heavy as is obvious by looking at where they put the battery mount, and where the sensor housing and everything else is. Put a piece of glass on that bigger than a 50mm, and all the weight is going to be on your arms all day.

So here's my read, and it's been the same since we started dealing with these digital cameras...

2/3" camera ops are going to complain about any form factor that doesn't seem similar to what they are used to. DSLRs are too small, DCP cams are too big and unweildy. Cinema guys coming from panavisions, or big Arris, see the 2/3" style cameras as things they want on steadicams, not what they want on their real mounts. DSLR guys think all the other stuff is too big and heavy, and then spend 2 years and $5k putting rails, cages, handles, and all other manner of stuff on their tiny cameras to make them into function DCP cams. But they still don't have meters, framing lines, or any of the stuff that makes a DCP camera do what it does so well.

The URSA seems to try to walk the line between all markets. Mount your DSLR in front of it and tie in with an HDMI cable. It's a little heavy for the 2/3" guys but has a lot of the same ergonomics same batteries, etc.. And for the DCP guys, they'll feel mostly at home with PL mount, confidence monitor, framing lines, good codecs, etc.

I give BM a lot of credit for this camera. It's got numerous compromises sure, but hits a great price point for the feature set and if they get it shipping with no major glitches, it should do well.

Don't feel bad for us. My BMCC does EXACTLY what I want it to do the way I expected it to do it. Those who were realistic about the camera seem EXTREMELY satisfied. And my investment has lost none of it's value. It will "B" camera to this new camera very nicely. It's almost as small as a DSLR and I can rig it practically anywhere.

As far as not being able to check time remaining costing you two hours, that's not the camera's fault. That's the fault of whoever is keeping your shot log. Just the same as if you'd been shooting on film. I shoot my BMCC just like it was a small film camera, and have had zero issues. I've never seen a film camera with zebras, or 709 conversion. I use a light meter and have had no surprises on set regardless of whether I am on DSLR, BMCC, EX1, DVX100, or any other camera.

chrisser1976 wrote:I don't own a BMCC myself but really feel for those that have invested. Worse of all must be seeing your investment lose a huge chunk of it's value.

I hired one the other day and it was far from a finished product. Not being able to check the time remaining on the drive cost us two hours per day, the Zebras not having a range (e.g. +/- 5%) and the way the 709 conversion is handled and/or a lack of dynamic range may have cost us the series.

It is a 2/3 inch broadcast camera - at least a version will be. I did 52 days fairly straight on a feature on a RED one and that was terrible to. Too heavy being just one problem, taking ages to switch to HH another.

Yeah light meter will work but meters can drift - it's called a K factor. When exposure changes in shot then Zebras are way more useful in my opinion. Yes film cameras didn't have Zebras but they did have TTL meters. I suppose if you treat it like a Bolex then that's one thing - but maybe not call it a 'production' camera. May be a B camera ? People have mentioned 'no problems' on set - but I'd really like to see something that works well on location too.

2/3 Inch cameras have had (albeit retrofitted) 15mm and 18mm rails for years. Chroziel seemed to sell loads. All of our hire cameras had them. They were great for shooting Drama - ours worked on 'The Office', 'Spaced', 'French and Saunders','The Fast Show' and the next day on doccos. Why don't you want that from a camera. ? A mainstream camera for the 4K era. Aja seem to get it - why not black magic ? If you're a jobbing cameraman or woman then that's the minimum starting point really.

You need 128gb of space to record 5 minutes of RAW footage.The largest capacity you can get is 128gb - good news though the camera has two slots so you can shoot for ten minutes without changing rolls. Back to shooting on film days. The cost of those two cards ? £2400. Two @X!ing thousand xxxtard four frig%&* hundred quid. Let's say we’re on a corporate with a fairly trigger happy director (director wants to shoot RAW as unsure of destination and wants to cover all bases - it has happened) covering ob doc and we shoot 50 mins of rushes per day (one and a 1/4 digi beta tapes - about £25 in the good old days). We’ll need five cards - that’ll be SIX THOUSAND POUNDS PLEASE, SIR - more than the camera. Erm, no. It would cheaper if the camera ran on cocaine and Parisian prostitutes.

It's a 2/3" broadcast camera the same way a DSLR is a movie camera. Big compromise, but people have been doing it for years.

Yes, film has a footage gauge, just like this camera will have timecode. Check the start time, increment 5 minutes or whatever, and there's your roll time. Yes, you need to have some awareness. Yes, the camera SHOULD be able to tell you time remaining. Should tell you battery time remaining too...

I don't see this thing as anything other than a B camera on a big shoot, and certainly an "A" camera on what would be a DSLR shoot. This is your locked down camera, while you run and gun on a DSLR. Or get the HDMI version and attach it to this for your dolly and sticks shots, and take the DSLR and put it on a small rig for your run and gun. I just don't see this as a primary shoulder cam. Especially not with a 10" screen in your way.

Yes, you could retrofit rails on 2/3" cameras. But that wasn't how they came standard. You can retrofit all the pieces in Arri's catalog to a GH3 but that doesn't make it RED. And that's my point. We adapt as required to get the shots we need. This thing is not going to displace the 2/3" shoulder cam for what those cameras do well. As far as AJA "getting it", what that means is that the camera format is what you prefer. For DSLR shooters, the CION is AJA "not getting it". Especially since it's PL mount only FORCING you into the most expensive glass around. It's a matter of perspective.

In terms of recording capacities, we are looking at the very beginning of CFast. When Compact Flash came out it was 256MB. You could get about 30 frames on a card from the still cameras of the time. Today, they wouldn't hold a single frame. When the HVX200 came out, P2 cards per hour were about what these CFast cards cost now. Yes, they could have gone with SSD, but dual SSDs would have taken a LOT more space in an already large and heavy camera, have much higher operating temps, and the cost savings wouldn't have been much. Most of the big films I see are writing uncompressed to Codex recorders. Those units costs twice as much as this camera minimum and the storage is $3500 a piece.

And while we're there, those AJA Pak media SSDs are running $700 for a single 256GB module. The CION doesn't even do RAW onboard. If Blackmagic enable their ProRes and DNxHD recording onboard like their other cameras do, then I think we'll see cost per hour fall right in line with the CION, but it will stiff offer the ability to shoot RAW in camera unlike the AJA.

Right now, I am getting 30 minutes per 240GB SSD on my BMCC shooting uncompressed RAW. The URSA cost's 3 times as much and the media costs 3 times as much. Seems fair to me. Not cheap, but it is what it is. Kodak Vision3 is running about $175 per minute and that's non-renewable.

The truth is, digital cinema has ALWAYS been a lot more expensive than "video". HDCam vs Still. B4 lenses versus PL. VariCams versus Arri D20/D21. Now, the digital cinema (low end) is CHEAPER than 2/3" but the media is not. Again, a tradeoff.

This camera is certainly not going to be for everyone. I think we can agree on that. And I think probably the user it's going to get the least traction with, is the 2/3" shooter. Panasonic seems to produce the right cameras for that market. Perhaps because they've been so invested in that market for so long.

Good point about PL. Ursa with it's upgradable mount/sensor is at an advantage. Cfast problem depends on how quickly the media costs come down. If Aja announced an EF mount then I'd put the deposit down on that even with higher than SSD media costs. Also am I right in thinking the Ursa doesn't have an Opitical low pass filter or back focus adjustment ? But with a theatrical release documentary overseas coming up the lighter Aja seems the most sensible option though we'd need to hire in PL lenses.

chrisser1976 wrote:Good point about PL. Ursa with it's upgradable mount/sensor is at an advantage. Cfast problem depends on how quickly the media costs come down. If Aja announced an EF mount then I'd put the deposit down on that even with higher than SSD media costs. Also am I right in thinking the Ursa doesn't have an Opitical low pass filter or back focus adjustment ? But with a theatrical release documentary overseas coming up the lighter Aja seems the most sensible option though we'd need to hire in PL lenses.

No OLPF that I can see. And the BF adjustment... not sure. I think since the mount and sensor come as a unit, it may be a case of they think that's fine. I suppose anything will need to be shimmed. But don't hold me to that.

Again, I just don't see this thing as being all that viable in the Docu world or even TV. This thing wants to be on sticks, or a dolly, or a jib, or something else where you don't physically have to deal with it's weight. Much the same as the large film and digital cinema cameras we've seen for so many years.

Those digital cinema cameras from the One to the Alexa are in my view a footnote until we get to 4K inEFP form factors. It would just make so much sense - a self contained camera that shoots with a super 35mm camera that can go on the shoulder or on the tripod in an instant. It'll happen - and the Ursa and Aja Cion are steps in the right direction. User upgradable sensor and mounts are a great idea and because of that and the price I'm not ruling Ursa out - it would be great for the PSC studio stuff I do - at least with a separate recorder - but the current in-camera media costs and weight make it hard work for location stuff. The Aja wins hands down for me on those two but PL only is a big minus - EF would be better as I have a set of primes in that fit and can get replacements from any camera store anywhere in the world.

When you need ENG style on the shoulder shooting, URSA features a separate down converted HD-SDI video output and a 12V power outlet that is dedicated for electronic view finders. The dedicated viewfinder output makes it simple to connect to third party EVFs or even additional on set LCD monitors, and power them directly from your camera. The viewfinder output includes all kinds of camera status information including frame rate, battery level, ISO setting, record format, record status, graticule markers and more. If you’re working in Ultra HD then for the best compatibly, the monitoring output can be selected to down convert to regular 1080 HD so you an use any third party monitoring or EVF, even regular televisions for on set monitoring!

chrisser1976 wrote:Thanks Rick. Deposit put down tonight with option of switching to the AJA or a refund after testing.

And that is the RIGHT way to do it. Get the camera in hand, test whether it will work for you, and if so, buy it. If not, find something else that will. The idea of buying a camera, sight unseen, and then being angry when it does not meet expectations is crazy to me.

I also found that the camera can shoot to ProResHQ at it's 4k output, so that gives me much more time on the internal cards than RAW. I secured budget for the camera today. Camera, lens, likely an Atomos recorder, a new video card to handle native 4K, and an upgrade to Avid MC7 which can cut 4k. Unfortunately, we cannot do a pre-order, or at least I don't think we can, so this is going to be a bit dicey.

This conversation reminds me of one I had many years ago on another forum, where I outlined the reasons I felt that 2/3" cameras would never be considered Digital Cinema Cameras. A lot has changed in that time, but I stil feel that way. Users who are used to 2/3" format cameras, servo-zooms, auto-focus, v-lock batteries, etc, are just coming from a TOTALLY different place than cinema people. I think in large part that's still true.

I see the Digital Camera market broken up into distinct camps, all with varying expectations on a camera they find suitable for filming a movie:

1. Guys who cut their teeth on film cinema cameras and still think that way. These guys would likely never think about putting a camera on their shoulders. This is a world of sticks, steadicams, jibs, techno-cranes, dollys, etc.

2. Broadcast guys. These are the 2/3, 1/2", 1/3" or even 3/4" for the old timers. Cameras go on sticks or the shoulder. Period. Handheld means shoulder mount. Locked down means sticks.

3. Handycam guys. This group was the XL1, DVX, HVX, mini-DV crowd. They built up companies like Letus, Cinevate, and others. Struggling to get their 1/3" and 1/4" sensor cameras to have that S35 look. Handheld was/is the norm. Maybe a light set of sticks, a fig-rig, a shoulder rig, or a steadicam jr.

4. DSLR guys. This is the new set. They've cut their teeth on pocket cameras, M43, GoPros, etc., and anything that gets away from 8-bit 4:2:0 is pushing the envelope.

Clearly this is an oversimplification but it speaks to the market and it's interesting to see how BM has targeted each of these groups. The BMPCC into group 4, the BMCC into group 3, and the new URSA trying to bridge the gap between groups 1 and 2. What is most entertaining is seeing the push and pull between groups 1 and 2. Broadcast folks thinking the URSA is too heavy, while the Cinema folks are saying it weighs about the same as the other cameras they typically shoot with. Cinema guys wondering why in the WORLD anyone would even consider the screen too big since it would NEVER be on anyone's shoulder, and the broadcast guys wondering why it doesn't record more than 15 minutes at at time!

On the surface, the broadcast cameras and the cinema cameras are quite similar. But it's the small details that really differentiate those cameras, and I fear that the URSA may have too many compromises from both camps to work well for either. Fortunately, it's cheap enough for both groups to say, "Lets see if we can make it work."

When I hear people complain about the weight, I just smile because I am old enough to remember seeing movies made on the older Panaflex's and Arriflexes which were 20-30 pounds bare and closer to 40 pounds rigged up. Even the most popular choice of 35mm cameras in my lifetime, the Arri 435 is 14-18 pounds bare depending on model, and the modern Panaflex cameras are around 18 pounds. Hell the old Mitchell's were probably close to 50-75 pounds, which is why you used them with a geared head.

For a more recent example, the IMAX Lightweight camera weighs 46 pounds unrigged, and that camera was used on the Batman series, even finding it's way onto the Steadicam rig. I had a chance to speak to Howard Hall about this, who's shot more IMAX than anyone else I know. He was in line for an Epic when we spoke a couple of years ago.

I say all that to say this. The URSA, if it's executed well, will be an incredibly popular camera. It's got most of the right stuff, it's got a terrific price, and can really be handled well without looking like a toy through the lens. I hope to have one this summer, if all goes well. Going to the CION might a bridge too far for our budget, and we may be back looking at a Sony.

Black Magic have intended this camera for a degree of hand held - this is evidenced in their website photography and text and reinforced with the addition of a 2/3 inch model complete with ND filter wheel. They are suggesting it can be kitted out with an EVF - essential for handheld and much documentary work (particularly if the alternative is a 10 inch screen close to the eye). They had to if they want this to be a drama camera. I think it's weight rules it out of some documentary work but not arts doc or historical where you're mostly on sticks.

I don't wholly recognise the categorisation of people into HDSLR and Digital cinema guys. Many people own or use on a regular basis different styles of camera. That has a lot to do with the job you're shooting - In a single week I can shoot on Alexa, PDW 800 and my HDSLR. I don't often think whilst on the PDW 800 'I wish I was on the other two' but I do wish for an electronic version of an Aaton XTR or an SR3 when I'm on the Alexa or even more so a RED. That camera would be a 4K EFP style camera and that's what both the Ursa and CION are. People telling me this isn't an 'ENG' camera seem to neglect the whole 'EFP' way of working at the end of the Super 16 era (particularly in UK drama). I'm still convinced that the future is 4K in an EFP shape. We may have used digital cinema cameras for years now but then people used starting handles on cars for years.

I am convinced that in the world of broadcast and perhaps documentary filmmaking, the future is 4k in an EFP shape. I am just as convinced that in narrative cinema, this shape will will never be popular for numerous reasons.

But I concede that you and I will never agree on this, and that's ok with me. Thank you for civil discourse and for allowing both ideas to have room to breathe here in the discussion.

chrisser1976 wrote:I'm still convinced that the future is 4K in an EFP shape. We may have used digital cinema cameras for years now but then people used starting handles on cars for years.

I was fortunate enough to attend NAB this year and take a look at the URSA camera up close.

I was impressed. I like the camera. It is heavier than I would have hoped, but in most other respects, it is a game changer in my opinion. Very, very impressive piece of hardware for the money. Grant Petty and his crew are to be highly congratulated, I think!

I DO have some comments. As an owner of Nikon glass, I would love to see a version of this camera with a Nikon mount. The nice thing about Nikon mounts is that they are also easy to adapt for use with Canon EF and PL, but the reverse is not the case,, unfortunately.

MFT, on the other hand, can be adapted for use with Nikon lenses as well. So if no Nikon mount can be accomplished (due to licensing issues or other such frustrations), and MFT mount would also be a great option for the URSA.

The global shutter is a HUGE deal for professional users. It is so great to see that on a 4K sensor at such a reasonable price point. 12 stop range is pretty good. Need to go up to 14 to kill Sony and Panasonic, but let’s be realistic. Look at the URSA price point. Fantastic. Sensors will probably be improved over time and the design allows changing them out instead of discarding the whole camera.

I don’t like that internal recording is limited to CFast cards. Option to record to SSD as well would be a fantastic added feature. I realize Cfast cards are needed for slow motion recording. Fine. But for most pro users, 23.98P, 25 or 29.97P is going to be the frame rate of choice . RAW option is marvelous, but ProRes Codec will be the usual choice to save file space. (Also DNx4K hopefully. More on that below). SSD is plenty fast enough for pro level, high end compressed, even at 4K.

That is really the way to go. The good news is that URSA sends out a 12G 4k signal out of SDI connector, so THAT means you can use the upcoming Atomos SHOGUN recording to record 4K in ProRes to an SSD!!!! All hail Atomos for that!

If Blackmagic is smart, they will create a new Hyperdeck Shuttle to record 4K to SSD ASAP. What a combo that would make with this URSA camera!!! Even better would be to add the SSD recording option internally in the URSA, but external option in form of new Hyperdeck shuttle (3.0?) would be an excellent start.

One thing that is a GLARING problem for Windows users is that AVID has not yet released DNx4K!!!

We really need DNx4K, because there is no viable option to render ProRes in the Windows world, and there is therefore NO reasonably efficient and ubiquitous way to render a finished show in 4K in the Windows environment. That is ridiculous. Truly ridiculous.

I have spoken to reps at Avid many, many times about this, but Avid seems to me like they are sitting on their hands. They are really behind the ball on this.

But back to BlackMagic. I should mention they have a "Studio Camera" now with 4K and an MFT lens mount, but it is not well suited to location/field work in terms of “rugged” design. Moreover, the sensor on THAT camera is NOT global. Dropping global shutter on that is a big mistake in my opinion.

I would love to see the MFT mount on the URSA, but obviously retain the Global Shutter. As I’ve pointed out, MFT mount (or better yet, Nikon mount) could open up the lens options marvelously!!!!

Glass is such a major consideration these days. Why not make the options as great as possible and attract as many people as possible. I believe Blackmagic could take over a massive chunk of the market by addressing some of the things I’ve listed here. FWIW, even so, the URSA is a great step in the right direction and earns my “BEST OF SHOW” award at NAB. Possibly use some sturdy, lighter weight materials for the body in the future... Just a few more steps in the right direction like that, more lens mount options, recording option to SSD, and it’s the winner across the board. Potential to wipe out everyone else in one fell swoop.

Are you listening, Grant Petty???? I hope so. If not, Katie Colledge, please forward this post! In the meantime, great progress!

mikerissi wrote:I DO have some comments. As an owner of Nikon glass, I would love to see a version of this camera with a Nikon mount. The nice thing about Nikon mounts is that they are also easy to adapt for use with Canon EF and PL, but the reverse is not the case,, unfortunately.

MFT, on the other hand, can be adapted for use with Nikon lenses as well. So if no Nikon mount can be accomplished (due to licensing issues or other such frustrations), and MFT mount would also be a great option for the URSA.

...

I would love to see the MFT mount on the URSA, but obviously retain the Global Shutter. As I’ve pointed out, MFT mount (or better yet, Nikon mount) could open up the lens options marvelously!!!!

...

Glass is such a major consideration these days. Why not make the options as great as possible and attract as many people as possible. I believe Blackmagic could take over a massive chunk of the market by addressing some of the things I’ve listed here.

I don't follow you here. The URSA has an EF mount available. Just like the Canon DSLRs. I use my Nikon lenses on EF mount all the time. I fail to see why this would present any problem.

As far as having a MFT mount, to what end? The glass spectrum is quite well covered by having the Canon and PL mounts available. This gives access to Anamorphic and Spherical cinema glass, the entire catalog of Canon glass, the entire catalog of Nikon glass, all the old M42 screwmount glass of which I have some, etc.

mikerissi wrote:One thing that is a GLARING problem for Windows users is that AVID has not yet released DNx4K!!!

I agree that would be nice.

mikerissi wrote:We really need DNx4K, because there is no viable option to render ProRes in the Windows world, and there is therefore NO reasonably efficient and ubiquitous way to render a finished show in 4K in the Windows environment. That is ridiculous. Truly ridiculous.

Well, this is not TECHNICALLY true. You CAN encode to ProRes 4444 on Windows using ffmbc. (http://www.authorityfx.com/encoding-vid ... n-windows/). Unfortunately, this is not at 4K. Additionally, as for outputting the finished show, are you familiar with h.265? Or do you mean output a master of the show and not a deliverable/streamable?

While it is great to hear that you are happy with the use of adapters to use your Nikon lenses with EF mounts, the folks at Nikon gave me a somewhat different answer when I asked them about this...

perroneford wrote:I don't follow you here. The URSA has an EF mount available. Just like the Canon DSLRs. I use my Nikon lenses on EF mount all the time. I fail to see why this would present any problem.

My desire to see a version of the camera with a native Nikon mount (also MFT) may be less of a concern, at least in most practical uses, after reading more on the subject from other users, such as yourself. I have seen some "Youtube" informal demonstrations of Nikon lenses on the Blackmagic CC using EF mount and they were impressive, though not exhaustive from a technical standpoint in terms of mathematical match, particularly on focusing planes. Circles of confusion can have more than one meaning here! Ha!

I visited Nikon while at NAB this year and they would not confirm that infinity focus was maintained properly through the use of a Nikon lens to Canon EF mount adapter. My impression from talking to them (and others) was that the difference in flange distances created a definite problem. Maybe someone from the camera design team at Blackmagic can address this from a mathematical standpoint.

="perroneford wrote:Well, this is not TECHNICALLY true. You CAN encode to ProRes 4444 on Windows using ffmbc. (http://www.authorityfx.com/encoding-vid ... n-windows/). Unfortunately, this is not at 4K. Additionally, as for outputting the finished show, are you familiar with h.265? Or do you mean output a master of the show and not a deliverable/streamable?

-P

For compressed file based delivery of video, so far professional post houses such as FotoKem in Burbank (which I frequent) seem only to recognize the upper flavors of Apple’s ProRes and DNx(HD) for passing quality control standards. Contractual deliverables that I have met and expect to meet in the future require one or both of these two codec standards to be met for quality control. HD is still acceptable for many situations. But that's not the point. 4K will soon become the standard for Masters as a deliverable. That is why DNx4K ought to be available right now.

For those who are interested in the problems with various lens mounts and associated issues concerning the use of lenses with adapters which may or may not solve flange distance mismatches, the following link explains it in general terms. Again, I spoke with reps from Nikon about using their lenses with an adapter on Canon EF mount. Unless they were being deliberately evasive with me, there will be issues. And in a professional environment, I do not believe this can be tolerated.

On the other hand, perhaps the information I was given by Nikon was incorrect. It wouldn't be the first time a rep was wrong.

Regarding Avid's missing DNx4K codec, I assure you it is a serious problem. Blackmagic users on Windows WANT to use Resolve to output 4k files. Right now, Windows users are limited, in the professional sense to outputting 4K with file sizes which are enormous and in many cases, wasteful. If anyone knows how to output ProRes 4K files on the Windows platform with Resolve, do tell.

I spoke with Resolve Demonstrators at NAB, and they agreed with me -- specifically that this issue of rendering files with professionally recognized QC standards, namely professional 4K files with reasonable compression for efficiency(!), is only going to become more pressing as users discover something is missing on the Windows side. Rendering huge files is not sensible or practical when the alternative is so plain.

One of the reasons think EFP/super 16 form factors will return to TV drama and probably cinema in the 4K (except for maybe high end blockbusters which will always be expensive and slow to shoot due to their FX requirements) is speed of production - time is the most expensive consumable on set and even on location. I should be clear here that I don't think the new generation of 4k EFP cameras will be an F900 with a 4K sensor and recording mechanism, rather a development of it and the Ursa is a step in that direction. I also think form factors will vie away from the EFP shape from time to time to accommodate new technologies like continuous tone, light field sensor and photon based storage (having great fun guessing at future technologies here !).

Of course all of our crystal balls are tinted by our own experiences and I can only speak within my experience which is of the UK TV drama and low budget features world.

Is there a suggestion that you can buy the one camera and two different chips and mounts sections for the same camera?

A camera that can be set up for a 2/3 chip and a S35mm chip, that you can swap for different jobs, now that is kind of useful. Seems to me that this is the big divide in the camera world at the moment, jobs that need large chip sensibilities and ones that need 2/3 optical qualities. At the moment the only option is to own two different cameras, this function would be a great step in bridging both requirements.

Shame about the weight issues as being able to sling it on your shoulder in 2/3 mode and run around all day would have made it a sure thing.

There is a 2/3 inch Ursa in the pipeline so presumably they wii sell the sensor modules to 'convert' the EF or PL Ursa to B4 mount. I don't think the modular system is designed to be switchable on a daily basis as the couplings may get damaged. I'm still looking at the Aja Cion because of it's weight. Shame it's only been announced as a PL mount.

In a previous post, I was asked why I thought an MFT mount version of this camera would also be desirable. In such a case as I have suggested, presumably, the sensor size would be the same as the newly released Blackmagic "Studio 4K Camera", but would have the global shutter!

Here is a link to a product made by a company called Metabones which has been receiving raves from some pretty intelligent folks, including Phillip Bloom. (If you don't know who he is, you should probably check out his web site. He has some good reviews of all kinds of cameras, including all earlier Blackmagic camera models.)

From what I've gathered, this "Speed Booster" adapter works exceptionally well with the Blackmagic MFT mount cameras and Nikon lenses. I have seen no reports of any problems with infinity focus using this combination of optics.

mikerissi wrote:In a previous post, I was asked why I thought an MFT mount version of this camera would also be desirable. In such a case as I have suggested, presumably, the sensor size would be the same as the newly released Blackmagic "Studio 4K Camera", but would have the global shutter!

Here is a link to a product made by a company called Metabones which has been receiving raves from some pretty intelligent folks, including Phillip Bloom. (If you don't know who he is, you should probably check out his web site. He has some good reviews of all kinds of cameras, including all earlier Blackmagic camera models.)

From what I've gathered, this "Speed Booster" adapter works exceptionally well with the Blackmagic MFT mount cameras and Nikon lenses. I have seen no reports of any problems with infinity focus using this combination of optics.

I have two metabones adapters for Nikon lenses that I use with my BMCC. Both work exceptionally well, and were fairly priced. But that doesn't help me understand what purpose a MFT mount would have on the URSA.

The primary problem with the MFT sensor (and thus the MFT mount) was that with a sensor that small, it was nearly impossible to get wide angle lenses with the quality of the Nikon and Canon offerings. People wanted to mount their Nikon and other full frame glass onto the M43 version of the Pocket camera and other M43 cameras and still get a reasonable wide angle. These adapters do that nicely. The added benefit of the speed increase is nice in some cases, but really overkill if you are already using good prime or zoom lenses.

The BMPC eliminates the "wide angle" problem because it is already a large sensor, and wide angle lenses are plentiful for it's sensor size.